991 "Factoids"
 

Hot off the PCA presses. some insight into what we can expect from Porsche on the next "New 911" due out in MY12.

From Porsche Panorama, the line will split into a 'base' 911 known as the 911S with a 3.4 liter engine (350PS) and then the upper end model will be the "Carrera RS" with the 3.8 liter engine (400PS) capable of 195 mph while getting 30 mpg. Wheelbase will go up 100mm, track a bit wider, with overhangs a bit shorter. They are also looking to abandon conventional side mirrors with small rear-looking cameras with small swiveling tv screens in the A-pillars. The 7-speed PDK tranny may ultimately do away with the 6-speed manual.

More like "Speculationoids" to me. :)

Silly marketing moves
 

There goes the go-kart dynamics we love in the 911, as its wheelbase will be 1" longer than the current mid-engine Cayman! :banghead:

I suspect they are doing this to mount a mid-engine setup in 911-look-alike racing cars. They are doing that strictly for marketing reasons instead of racing the Cayman which is what they should do. :to_order:

To OCBen: this is more than speculation. The writing has been out there in photos of many 991 mules (see HERE).

But it's less than fact.

It's not pudding until it's pudding.

Pure speculation, and not educated speculation at that. Not possible to reach 195mph with only 400hp. And Porsche will not miss an opportunity to charge $4k+ for the PDK (with SC) option.

I'm having a hard time envisioning the rear view TV screens -- kind of like the simplicity of a mirror. Would suck to only have a PDK option.

It's actually 394.5 hp. That's what that BS, I mean PS metric "horspower", converts to.

Why not?

Top speed of the 997.1 S with 355 HP is 186 mph.

45 more HP should be worth 9 mph, no? Especially since they are constantly working on weight savings.

Weight (mass) is not a factor in top straight-line speed, given a long enough runway. Air drag is.

Air drag and frictional drag.

Terminal velocity is reached when the acceleration force is equaled by the combined drag forces of air and friction (wheel bearings, rolling friction of the tires, etc.).

What he said.

You don't think that an extra 45 HP is good for an extra 9 mph top speed then?

It's only 15HP. The current car has 385HP and top speed is 188MPH.

Taking the mirrors off reduces parasitic drag a bit. I'm at 185 mph with 355hp, so 400hp should be good for another 10 mph.

OK, let's compare apples to apples here.

I mentioned the 997.1 with a top speed of 186 mph and 355 HP. A 400 HP upgrade would require an extra 9 mph (to 195) with 45 extra horses.

A 997.2 with 385 HP and a top speed of 188 would require an increase in top speed of 7 mph with 15 extra HP.

Granted the curve is not looking favorable for an increase to 195 but if they improve the cars Cd (which I assume they are trying to by redesigning the mirrors etc) it's not outside the realm of possibility.

The hp you need to approach higher speeds increases exponentially with speed. I was reading in Autoweek about the Koenigsseg (sp) CCX, and they mentioned something like the difference between getting 214mph and 215mph is something like 100hp. I don't remember if the exact numbers are right, but it's something along those lines. So yea, I wouldn't assume that 45HP is good for an extra 9mph up to 195mph.

No. Consider that top speed of the 997.2 S with 30 more hp only increases top speed by 2mph to 188, the 997.1 GT3 with 415hp does 193mph, and the 997.2 GT3 with 435hp is 194mph. Even the F430 with 483hp and the Z06 with 505hp don't reach 195mph.

As others pointed out, top speed isn't about weight. And these cars can't get much more aerodynamic; as power and speeds increase, wider tires and required downforce decrease aero efficiency (as do intakes for engine cooling, brake cooling, etc. that are required with higher power and higher speeds).

I knew I should have stayed awake in Physics class.

The brief article on page 59 of the April 2009 issue of Parorama does NOT say the PDK will replace the 6-speed manual transmission. The article says "[A]nd a very efficient "seven-step" CVT (continuously variable transmission) MAY replace the manual." The PDK is NOT a CVT transmission; the PDK is a dual clutch twin-shaft geared transmission. A CVT is completely different in that it has no gears with gear changes or steps unless imposed artifically for purposes of feel.

If they ever did that, I'd NEVER buy another new one and I know I'm not alone. :(

Sounds like a good rumor to encourage sales of the current model.

That will likely never see the light of day.

Think of the potential lawsuits from electronic glitch failures. Side mirrors are a safety feature. Eliminating them to potentially make a street car go faster is absurd.

There's a better chance of them doing away with the silly stickers on the sun visors - and that ain't ever gonna go away.

Those are mainly pipe dream speculations of the uninformed. Far from being facts at this point.

How many of you actually have driven your cars at top speed? I think you're paying for bragging rights if you're focusing on top speed. I've driven both my 996 and 997 (non-S) up to 155 MPH, but I've never found an environment where I could take it all the way to top speed.

Bragging rights are important, though! Just be aware that top speed may not be something you get to do everyday with your car (unless you are extremely lucky!). Which is why I don't drive an S - I get plenty of ya-ya's out of the straight up Carrera.

Personally, I'd invest the extra dollars into racing school and experience (autocross or track) until you, the driver, are no longer the performance bottleneck.

I don't think that many 997 drivers are that immature to be concerned with bragging about hitting the limit on their cars. Most are responsible adults who simply appreciate the quality of the engineering and manufacturing excellence. I think the personalized plate of a good friend of mine summed it up well: "O2GO162" (He had a 1985 930 Turbo).

I just read the Panorama article and did a search here on Rennlist to land on this topic. Do any of you think this is a Panorama April Fool's joke?

Seriously to potentially eliminate a manual transmission for a CVT that belongs on an economy car? And the electronic screens in lieu of mirrors? Sounds like someone pulling our legs. Anyone else think the same?

I don't know about the CVT but substituting cameras for mirrors and a longer wheelbase has been reported by several sources for a while. PCA is a serious organization and Panorama would not publish anything without some solid base.

I think it's only a matter of time before side mirrors are gone from all passenger cars and trucks. Removing the side mirrors from a vehicle can make a dramatic improvement on drag coefficient which improves fuel economy and efficiency. It's not just to make the car go faster, but it's a useful technique for eking a few more mpg out of a car and improving range.

Several boutique electric and hybrid cars (like the Aptera) have this feature already, and I think they're just trendsetting. Even GM has incorporated camera rear view in prototype vehicles like the Cadillac Converj (built on the Chevy Volt guts). It's easy to imagine the next generation Prius or Insight doing it.

It's no more of a legal liability than drive-by-wire and I think we'd all better get used to seeing earless cars sooner rather than later.

Longer wheelebase on the 991? What wheelbase??? ;)

Here's what the Aptera looks like (from their website), for those not familiar with this electric car.
http://blog.wired.com/cars/images/20...era_press1.jpg

Don't confuse camera enabled rear viewers with side view camera viewers. Honda's had rear view cameras on their SUVs for some time now, but they never did away with the rear view mirror. It was simply to improve safety by augmenting the rear view mirror with a rear view camera while backing up.

The point I was making is that just because something is technically feasible, that doesn't mean it will ever see the light of day, what with the DOT regulations auto makers need to conform to, hence my example of the obnoxious stickers on the sun visors.

If by drive-by-wire you mean steering by wire and braking by wire; again, just because it's technically feasible that doesn't mean it will ever see the light of day in our ever increasingly nanny-type of government we currently live in, especially with the gradual left turn (some might say sharp left turn) the government is now taking.

When it comes to automobiles, the government will always choose safety over economy. Remember that. And the government will always mandate such things as mechanical steering instead of steering by wire, hydraulic braking instead of braking by wire, and ugly stickers on your sun visors to remind you that your car is equipped with air bags.

Not likely. The ACO regulation require the GT2 cars to be homologated to road going cars, so unless Porsche produce a road going mid-engined car, they can't race one.

top speed
 

[QUOTE=useridchallenged;6482246]How many of you actually have driven your cars at top speed? I think you're paying for bragging rights if you're focusing on top speed. I've driven both my 996 and 997 (non-S) up to 155 MPH, but I've never found an environment where I could take it all the way to top speed................."
[QUOTE]

I'm with you; top speed has always beem one of the dumbest specs. I'd love to see some spreadsheet guru start a thread on "Fastest you've driven your 911", but unfortunately I think this would encourage some Turkeys to run theirs up too high plus no telling how much fantasy would be reported.

The question re homolgation is 'How many road going cars do they need to build?' It's not out of the question to think that P-car would build 'X' special road cars to be able to race a few.

Remember BMW had a V8(I think) in a M3 a few years ago, and only promised to build road cars...and never did.

I picked up the April copy of Car Magazine (i.e., the UK magazine). It had an article with much of the same information as Edgy has here -- rear view cameras, etc. As for transmissions, it said that initially a 7 speed manual would be offered along with PDK, and later (i.e., at 991 refresh time) they would offer a CVT and PDK. (This contradicts what I had previously heard -- that the CVT was a long-term replacement for PDK.) At any rate, CVTs are pretty dismal, imo, and I can only hope this doesn't come to be. As for engines, Car had the same info as Edgy has here (minus the top speed info), but it said that Porsche would be using turbos in lower end cars (i.e., like the current day C2 and C2S) as the model evolves. Notably, all of these proposals have something in common -- increased MPG and reduced CO2 emissions.

Oil Dipstick? Too simple. Let's go electronic.
Side-view mirror? Puh-leez...we can overthink that one, too! Let's go digital!

The new of smaller engines, turbos, CVTs - it's not Porsche's fault. The EPA and the Euro greens essentially control the car industry today via environmental mandates.

Ten years from now, we'll all be buying used cars - cars being produced right now - if we want to retain any kind of decent driving experience.

Here is the regulation:
ART. 2 - GRAND TOURING CAR "LM" GT2
2.1 - Eligibility :
2.1.1 - ACO is the only authority to judge the eligibility of a "LM"
GT2 car.
2.1.2 - Eligibility criteria of a "LM" GT2 Grand Touring car are
made out by the ACO.
2.1.3 - The "LM" GT2 Grand Touring car must meet a minimum
of the following criteria :
a/ To be regularly produced by a manufacturer
approved by ACO ;
• A regular production implies a permanent
implementation of the means required to
produce a minimum of 1 car per week for the
"big manufacturers" and one car per month
to the "small manufacturers". If the
production is not respected, the ACO will
suspend the homologation of the car the year
after. The suspension of the homologation
will cease once the production delay has
been made up. It will be permitted to
compete with the car as soon as a minimum
of 100 road cars for the "big manufacturers"
and 25 road cars for the "small
manufacturers" will be produced.
b/ To have a launch campaign : exhibitions in motor
show, tests with journalists, leaflets with the
technical specifications of the car…
c/ To have a commercial network at its disposal
which provide an after-sales service. An
exemplary of the spare parts' catalogue and the
maintenance manual must be delivered to the
ACO during the homologation of the car.
d/ To be equipped with an engine used in a
production car and made in a quantity of at least
1000 (one thousand) units.
e/ To have a "Full type CEE" homologation or
equivalent for United States or Japan. For the
small manufacturers an official "Low Volume"
homologation for the model of car will be
accepted.
• Vehicles with a "Low-Volume" type approval
which have not undergone frontal crashtesting
must comply with the F.I.A. frontal
crash-test defined in article 258A-15, with the
weight of the series vehicle reduced by 5%,
or that required for the full type approval (EU
or the USA or Japan).

Pirelli gets OE fitment on latest Porsche 911
If someone has already posted this info, my bad.
"FRANKFURT, Germany (Sept. 15, 2011) — German car maker Porsche A.G. has selected Pirelli’s P Zero ultra-high-performance (UHP) tire as an OE fitment on the latest iteration of its iconic 911 sports car.
Porsche will use specially developed versions of the P Zero on its 911 Carrera and Carerra Turbo models, according to Pirelli Tyre S.p.A. The new Carerra debuted at the Frankfurt Motor Show this week.
The new Carerra’s fitments are 245/35ZR20 front and 295/30ZR20 rear, with each being built with specific compounds, Pirelli said. The rear size uses an aramid-fiber overlay for improved thermal stress control, which helps deliver maximum lateral grip.
The P Zero tread features side blocks with optimized sipe depths to reduce noise emissions in compliance with European Union regulations.
The size fitments for the Carrera Turbo will be 245/35ZR20 on the front and 305/30ZR20 on the rear.
Pirelli said it has more than 200 OE fitment approvals for the P Zero."

Those will be cheap!

Sarcasm... Catch the fever

It appeared that the cars in frankfurt had Michelins on them. Hmmm... this should be interesting as I have never been a fan of Pirelli high performance tires. There must have been a delay with Michelin getting the tires to market in time.